A picture would help folks describe what to do.

In general I would go for good branching habits, eliminate crossed branches, watch out for tight angles, that type or thing.

Clean your pruning tool between uses btw.

Sometimes there just ins't any central leader. You can still use good pruning protocols to aid the tree in developing as good a structure as it can. So too with such species as honeylocust-there may not really be a central leader yet we cab still make good trees out of them. But yes, a photo might help us to help you.

are you using the camera/photo icon under the box you type in ???

how tall ...

why do you think one central leader is necessary ???.. as you are out and about.. just look at other trees ... and see its not that big a deal ... especially now that leaves are falling .... easier to see structure ....

cant go much further without a pic ... also be nice to know where you are ... and how frequent the windstorms are ...

ken

Ok, got the photo...

The photo was taken from a ladder. The lead branch that goes off to the right at a 45 degree angle originates at 8 ft off the ground. The branch is 6 ft long.

The branch IS the tree's leader, it's just going off at a 45 degree angle and there's no central leader to subordinate to.

zacharyroeder's ideas · More Info

I have a beautiful 35" DBH Willow Oak in my back yard.

The current high point is likely to stiffen up and become the new lead. When the tree is much bigger the existing bend in the trunk may no longer be present.

Over time the proximity of this eventually full sized tree to the sidewalk may become more of a problem than the details of the tree's current structure.

Is that a Y that I see? Remove one of the branches in the Y and stake the "dominant" one for 6 months to give it a start.

I wouldn't do much. Plenty of ways you can screw it up! In some species, young plant gives little hint of what mature tree will look like. Am. elm is classic example. This willow may be another. Plants are phototropes and this plant will grow towards the light. That's going to change everything you think is a problem here.

If it were mine, I'd wait until early spring and cut it off at the ground... it'll resprout from the stump and then you can let the best sprout turn into a new tree. Trust me, it'll be back up to 8' in no time since it already has established roots.

what a mess ... before i just got rid of it ... i would probably .. remove all the lateral branches.. and then take the top off just below the 45 bend ... and train a new leader ...

with no insult to the root mass.. you might be surprised how fat it might regrow ...

imo.. there is nothing you can do with it .. above the bend...

and if that all failed.. i would get rid of it.. in a year or two ...

ken

I took the photo from a ladder to get the best shot I could of that top branch. The tree isn't actually 9ft from the sidewalk, so roots should be ok, and the yard is sloped up, so branch clearance shouldn't be a problem.

I think the lateral branches are important for developing girth and proper taper, so I'm not a fan of excessive pruning for a straight trunk. Since it is an oak (quercus phellos), those lower branches likely won't even try to compete or stick around anyway.

However, I was thinking along the same lines as you regarding the top. I really don't think the 45 degree bend is going to straighten itself out, and I don't see any other new leader with potential. Topping is generally a big no-no, but I can't help but think a new leader (or likely 10 resorts to pick from) will be better than what I have.

I really don't like the idea of completely starting over. I can imagine myself ending up in the same exact position in 5 years :( We've also lost a couple of large trees in the past 5 years, so I'm sort of desperate to keep whatever I have.

I can always go with the "do nothing" option another year or two until my choices become more clear.

Topping is generally a big no-no,

==>> this isnt really topping ... where every large branch at height is cut.. leaving multiple gaping wounds ... i mean really.. your title was brilliant ... but you didnt call it.. 'how do i top this tree' ...

a big part of pruning.. is for injury .. yours was severely injured .... its time to prune it ...

did you forget to post the ladder pic??

ken

I can't make you believe me, but what you see now gives little clue as to how this tree will shape up. No, a 45-degree angled branch won't magically straighten itself out. But new growth will shoot for the sun. This will tend to make these supposed structural problems go away. I'm seeing lots of bad advice being flung your way here. Please, don't submit to the panicked voices here; Trees can be managed. It takes time, but you have time. I would urge reading and study, not sawing and pruning, as your first steps to take. If you can wrap your head around the concept of subordination pruning, you will be ahead of almost everybody else in the world when it comes to understanding young tree care.

Wisconsintom, I totally agree with the patience you're preaching. At the very least, I have until spring to decide what, if anything, to do. I'm just having a hard time imagining how this tree could possibly correct itself, or even get on a better path.

I've watched this branch since the damage first occurred. And now it is a 6 ft long "leader" at a 45 degree angle, 8ft off the ground. If there were another leader to subordinate to, I would. New growth has not shot from the main trunk towards the sun. Instead it's grown at the end of this errant whip. There's nothing to subordinate to. There's no leader to promote.

I see three options:

1: Do nothing until the picture becomes more clear. **I suspect my 6 ft branch at a 45 degree angle will become an 8 or 10 ft branch at a 45 degree angle, and will continue to be the leader.

2: Cut back the tips of the 45 degree branch. **The hope would be to slow it down with the hope of a new better leader emerging ... This would resemble subordination pruning, except there is no leader to subordinate to.

3: Cut the whole 45 degree branch off. **New shoots will hopefully emerge from which to select a leader in a few years. Clearly the most aggressive option, but again, could just set the tree back, with the same result again.

So OK, somewhere in this thread I called that a willow. No, it's an oak. There. That's done. Z, you surely could shorten that branch up. I sense a good level of understanding in your words and that makes a difference! So, are there really no side branches, no little branchlets, no buds even....to cut that branch back to? I mention buds because in some cases that's all you've got. It's not ideal-we generally would like whatever we're cutting back to to be a minimum of three times the diameter of that which was removed......but sometimes, beggars can't be choosers, and this might be one such case. In any event, you won't hurt the tree by shortening that branch. But best if there is at least something to cut back to.

Here are a couple of more photos:

zwr100s ideas · More Info

zwr100s ideas · More Info

There are 5 branches originating from the point where the old top broke off (they were there before the top broke off). So it's not that there's nothing to cut back to, it's that there's no good leader to release. All the branches at the top are between 45 degrees and horizontal. Most of those branches are 2 - 4 feet in length, and pencil thickness.

It appears that the one branch that's thickest and longest is the current leader... but sets the tree on a poor structural path, unless I do something about it.

Here's yet another example of ridiculous nursery practice, the tree having been topped at some point in production....you know, "to make it bush out". You've got plenty of options to shorten that errant thing up to-any of those side branches will do. Best is one that faces outward-away from the trunk-but even if you don't have that, I think I'd subordinate that branch, even if to what I don't know! It will help the tree to produce a decent structure I think. You might have whittle on it more into the future. I know-almost the opposite of what it might have seemed I was initially saying...but now that I can see it better, that's what I'd likely do-shorten that branch to a lateral, and observe new growth patterns. Like i said, it still might take a cut or two-but later-to make things right.

Me, I'd let it alone & not worry. Many oaks will have less-than-perfect (in our perception) form, but are quite healthy. As it gets bigger, the awkwardness will lessen.

Honestly, at this point instead of fighting with it, I would cut it to the ground and start over, training a new leader.

Definitely no need for the nuclear option. Things are just not that bad here! I would suggest shortening the offending branch-back to a lateral or branchlet if at all possible-and then letting the tree grow some. New growth will be controlled by phototropism, so will tend to balance plant crown and make it look more "normal" over time. Nothing more need be done.